On 21.12.11 12:14, Javier Godoy wrote:
> On 2011-12-18 18:58, Julian Reschke wrote:
>
>> On 2011-12-18 22:11, Werner Baumann wrote:
>> > Copy with Depth: 0 is one of the fancy ideas of RFC 4918 that was
>> never
>> > seriously defined, just as Collection is mostly undefined.
>>
>> The spec says:
>>
>> "A COPY of "Depth: 0" only instructs that the collection and its
>> properties, but not resources identified by its internal member URLs,
>> are to
>> be copied."
>>
>> The problem I can see is that if you read this literally, you'd copy the
>> bindings to the member resources, which is unlikely to be intended.
>> Sounds
>> like an erratum to me.
>>
>> Do you see other problems?
>
> It follows that the requirement in Section 9.8.4 does not hold if
> Depth is 0:
> "when a collection is overwritten, the membership of the destination
> collection after the successful COPY request MUST be the same
> membership as
> the source collection immediately before the COPY."
>
Not necessarily. I think this is intented to prevent a non-empty
collection from being overridden by an empty collection. The COPY with
Depth:0 must fail then.
Regards,
Manfred
--
Manfred Baedke
<green/>bytes GmbH
Hafenweg 16
D-48155 Mnster
Germany
Amtsgericht Mnster: HRB5782